Islamism

Here's a necessary primer for those of you who comment on this situation without knowing what Hamas, or it's philosophy of Islamism, is.

Islamism does not mean Islam. Islamism means (from google definition): Islamism (Islam+-ism; الاسلامية al-'islāmiyya) also إسلام
سياسي al-Islām al-Siyāsiyy, lit., "Political Islam") is a set of ideologies holding that Islam is not only a religion but also a political
system, and that modern Muslims must return to their roots of their religion, and unite politically.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt - which now rules the country - is a bastion of this philosophy. Islamism is an extremist creed that seeks to impose
the law of Islam - the Shari'a - on all people within the boundaries of the Dar Al Islam (the abode of Islam); it's longer term goals after securing
an Islamic caliphate, is the conversion of the Dar Al Harb (the abode of war; or non-Muslim lands) into Dar Al Islam. Thus, Islamism is a direct
threat against all non-Muslim civilizations.

Hamas, which was created by the Muslim Brotherhood, is based on this ideology. Within the Gaza strip, Christians are subject to the life-sucking
Jizya tax, which helps to keep the Christians poorer than their Muslim neighbors. Islamism, in line with
the fundamentalist Sunni Shari'a, forbids the sale of alcohol in Gaza, gambling, forbids the playing of music, dancing and other types of revelry; it
forces women to wear the hijab and to cover their arms, legs at all times. Even if they want to swim, they have to wear full body covering; never can
a Muslim women experience the shining rays of the sun on her naked skin - not according to the strict line of the Shari'a. Anyone who seeks to do any
of these things has their life threatened; if they persist in doing it, they're killed.

This philosophy has now taken hold of the government of Egypt. It is the largest party in the
Tunisian parliament. It's prime minister Hamadi Jebali is an Islamist. Large segments of the
Free Syrian Army fighting against the Al-Assad regime is
Islamist

The leader of al Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has voiced his support for the Syrian rebels and called upon Syrians to retaliate against the
government.

Interviews with the FSA suggest that its top commanders see the Islamists as "a threat to stability post regime change". FSA commander Saleem
Abu Yassir expressed his fears to The Guardian: "They are stealing the revolution from us and they are working for the day that comes after"

To those unaware, the Al-Assad regime is allied with Shi'ite Iran. The current grand Ayatollah Khameini said that the Alawi (a minority religious
group in Syria, the religion of the Assad) are Shi'ite. So, this fight within Syria is also an internecine religious conflict between the Sunni
Islamists and the Shia Islamists. No Jews here; no Israel. If Israel were gone, the Sunni-Shia battle for regional supremacy would continue until one
or the other got the upper hand.

The battle for Libya is being waged between secular democrats and Islamists

The entire Muslim world is caught between the strictly conservative and authoritarianism of Shari'a and the demand for man to be allowed to make his
own choices in how he wants to live. In short, it's a battle between western liberalism and Islamic fundamentalism

What's occurring in Israel is by no means fundamentally different. Hamas is an Islamist group which desires

The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state
in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories,[1] and the obliteration or dissolution of Israel.[

.

Thus, there is no real "Palestinian people". The secularist supporters of Fatah or the PA are at interminable ideological odds with the Islamist
supporters of Hamas. If the Jews were gone, the fight would be transferred to the Secularist and Islamist Arabs who wont come to an agreement on what
kind of state should be established.

The Hamas charter also has some typical conspiracy theory claims against Jews:

According to Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, "The Hamas credo is not just anti-Israel, but profoundly anti-Semitic with racism at
its core. The Hamas Charter reads like a modern-day 'Mein Kampf.'" According to the charter, Jewish people "have only negative traits and are
presented as planning to take over the world."[23] The charter claims that the Jews deserve God’s/Allah’s enmity and wrath because they received
the Scriptures but violated its sacred texts, disbelieved the signs of Allah, and slew their own prophets.

I have nothing against Islam. In fact, the issue is entirely akin to peoples views with regard to the separation of the church from the state. If
Islam is practiced in private, and not imposed on others, I am all for it. I find it's spirituality and it's conception of God as pathos as very
close to my own, in fact. The problem is this authoritarianism that threatens to impose it's beliefs on others. If Christianity had gone in this
direction, or If Judaism attempted the same, I would put up my arms and condemn them just as I now do towards Islamism.

There is an undeniable conflict between western civilization and Islamism. In supporting Hamas, you support Islamism. You ignore the fact that Israel
- despite all it's faults - represents liberal democracy: it gives people the freedom to condemn their own state, if they so wish. Does
Hamas/Islamism? Ones tongue would be cut out if he were to utter an imprecation against the state of Allah.

This current conflict cannot be removed from the context of the wider conflict between western civilization and Islamism. Israel simply wants the
rocket attacks to end, but Hamas, seeing Muslims as nothing more than 'units' to be used in the "greater struggle" or Jihad, against western
civilization (which they imagine to be controlled by Jews) is willing to sacrifice men, women and children - individuals - for the sake of the
'whole' - the pursuit of establish an Islamist state in Palestine.

They are cold hearted, they resort to every method imaginable in their war against Israel. Seeing the deaths of children does not impel them to stop;
rather, it encourages them to go forward; every death of a child is a propaganda instrument against Israel, an instrument they know will count for
very much in western press, and in Israel. As Hassan Al Banna said: "We love death more than you love life.”, which is to be understood in the
spiritual sense of being extinguished by God; if one is annihilated by Gods presence, all is 'death' - and there is no qualitative or quantifiable
difference between death in the spiritual sense - of the ego - and death in the physical sense. This is what is meant by 'we love death more than you
love life'; this is why Islamism uses human beings as fodder in their fight against Israel and 'heretics'.

Hamas, which was created by the Muslim Brotherhood, is based on this ideology.

False

"Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation," says Mr. Cohen, a Tunisian-born Jew who worked in Gaza for more than two decades.
Responsible for religious affairs in the region until 1994, Mr. Cohen watched the Islamist movement take shape, muscle aside secular Palestinian
rivals and then morph into what is today Hamas, a militant group that is sworn to Israel's destruction.

Instead of trying to curb Gaza's Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a
counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat's Fatah. Israel cooperated
with a crippled, half-blind cleric named Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, even as he was laying the foundations for what would become Hamas. Sheikh Yassin
continues to inspire militants today; during the recent war in Gaza, Hamas fighters confronted Israeli troops with "Yassins," primitive
rocket-propelled grenades named in honor of the cleric.

Maybe it's just me, but if i witness the death of my child or children or wife and family, you can bet your worldly goods i will retaliate with a
unofficial resistance.

That's not the situation.

Hamas, the leadership, knows that by continuing to shoot rockets at Israel, that Israel will continue to bomb Hamas buildings in the Gaza strip. Since
Hamas locates these buildings besides residential buildings, elementary schools and nurseries, they increase the odds that civilians will be killed.

In such a situation, is morally horrendous to continue shooting rockets knowing that you're only bringing greater suffering on the people of Gaza.

If Israel were to stop, and the rockets continued to fly at Israeli towns and cities, terrorizing Israeli's, would you condemn Hamas?

The sad truth is, the world doesn't seem to care too much when Israeli's are being terrorized.

Now flip it around. Its you and your children who subject to daily sirens warning people of an incoming rocket. Would you not be angered? Would you
not want war to remove these Islamists from power?

Well presented thread though sir, although i don't totally agree with it, and it has a touch of agenda base in there.

Appreciate the compliment.

As for an agenda, of course there's an agenda. The agenda is to increase awareness of Islamism.

They are cold hearted, they resort to every method imaginable in their war against Israel. Seeing the deaths of children does not impel them to stop;
rather, it encourages them to go forward; every death of a child is a propaganda instrument against Israel, an instrument they know will count for
very much in western press, and in Israel.

A spokesman for the ministry accused the Israel Defense Forces of killing the boy. "Hameed Abu Daqqa was killed by an Israeli military helicopter
after being shot in the head while playing football with his friends east of Khan Younis," ministry spokesman Ashraf al-Qidra told CNN.

Based on the principles of Islamic fundamentalism gaining momentum throughout the Arab world in the 1980s, Hamas was founded in 1987 (during the
First Intifada) as an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood

While I provide ideological support for my claims, you just simply quote the opinions of one Jew.

There is substantial difference between "encouraging" Hamas, which is what Israel did to counter Arafat's PLO during the first intifada, and
actually creating Hamas, it's ideology - which is its essential basis.

To say so is simply a lie. A very untenable lie.

Tell that to the people in Palestine and Gaza, I am sure they would disagree. Is this an attempt to make the current palestinians the illegitimate
occupants of their land?

I meant that in the sense of having a singular vision of what a Palestinian state would look like. There is no singular vision, because there isn't a
united people. Hamas and Fatah are bitter ideological foes.

Islamism, is something that I always associate with the political arm of Islam rather like that of a “western” political ideology. At its core, as
I understand, is the idea that Islam is a way of life which provides both a political and social guide as it does a personal guide. In our modern
society we see this often as backward or cruel and imposing, we are shocked that women are forced to wear a vale. Yet I often think we don’t ask
ourselves often enough if that is what the people want, the Iranian revolution was a fight back against a western authority in favour of a Islamic
authority at the time it is what the people wanted. Likewise the people of Yemen and large groups of Saudi’s actively want Shari’a law. The
Taliban for instance thought of Shari’a law as a means to end the lawlessness and corruption in their country of the early 1990’s. Quite often we
in the west are too quick to dismiss Islam as a political ideology, we forget that this is what these people belief and it does not acknowledge human
rights or democracy because its idea’s come from a higher power than man, God.

On saying all of that I do believe it to be too extreme and wrong but this is form a purely western perspective. I do not think it is right for us to
force regime change just because we disagree with their choice in political ideology as it is as much a religious choice as it is a political one.
However once the people do show that they want change as in what we have just now in Syria then I think under some circumstances intervention can be
justified.

I think the OP is correct to say there is a conflict just now in the Muslim word between moderate seculars and authoritarian Islamists. The key thing
to remember however is that for some this is in reality a holy war, a war between the unbelievers and God, they see themselves as serving God. Quttb
one of the founders of violent Islamic extremism is very good to read up on specifically upon this point. He said that the Islamic word was in a state
of Jahiliyyah or “ignorance of God” it is like Islam in being attacked with increasing secularisation and his solution was to fight back.

This however I think is where the danger in discussing political Islam comes into play. The ideology of Quttb and the Takfir with a pan-Arabic view
that fuel Islamic terrorism are not found in all aspects of Islamic ideology or even that of all Islamic terrorist organisations. This is where
things start to become very complicated and convoluted.

All in all I must say I good thread about a topic I am very interested in so thanks OP.

Just read through this thread again, based on others comments I can see why there are accusations of the OP showing some bias or agenda. But the
actual ideology he is trying to discuss is really quite fascinating and probably not discussed often enough on ATS. It is a shame that people can’t
discuss the philosophy without an agenda.

Also the OP appears to be talking about Quttbism rather than true Islamism but the point still remains.

Here's the part that i disagree with, and ruined a very well presented thread with some good information.

Thus, there is no real "Palestinian people".

In this agenda seeded comment, which is the whole premise of the current conflict in Israel/Palestine, and under this basis America doesn't really
exist either right ?

Now flip it around. Its you and your children who subject to daily sirens warning people of an incoming rocket. Would you not be angered? Would you
not want war to remove these Islamists from power?

And don't get me wrong, i understand Israeli peoples frustration of being in fear of incoming mortars,
but Hamas and the Israeli government are both right winged movements in reality, that's the way i see it, and there will never be peace.

In the big picture, it's like 2 feral kids, who won't do as they are told, and both need a good slap on the ass, and sent to there rooms until they
learn to behave..

You shouldn't hate a religion because someone uses it in a way to supress or kill you either.

Now, where is the coherence between your analogy and this statement? You seemed to have contradicted yourself. Your analogy compares Islamism to the
gun, then stating that the shooter should be hated, not the gun. But then here you say we shouldn't hate the "shooter", which would correspond to
Islam, even though the shooter/Islam uses it (the gun/Islamism) to suppress or kill us.

OR, maybe you should read the articles you post. From the same Andrew Higgins article, AFTER he discusses how Israel helped prop up Hamas as a
counterweight against the PLO, he states:

Hamas traces its roots back to the Muslim Brotherhood, a group set up in Egypt in 1928.

Again, I based my argument on ideological support. While you play around with words like "create" trying to give the impression that Israel
creates/supports/directs Hamas, which is a flat out lie and calumny.

See all the history?? You could learn a lot from that article:

After the 1948 establishment of Israel, the Brotherhood recruited a few followers in Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza and elsewhere, but secular
activists came to dominate the Palestinian nationalist movement.

The Muslim Brotherhood, led in Gaza by Sheikh Yassin, was free to spread its message openly. In addition to launching various charity projects,
Sheikh Yassin collected money to reprint the writings of Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian member of the Brotherhood who, before his execution by President
Nasser, advocated global jihad. He is now seen as one of the founding ideologues of militant political Islam.

You shouldn't hate a religion because someone uses it in a way to supress or kill you either.

Now, where is the coherence between your analogy and this statement? You seemed to have contradicted yourself. Your analogy compares Islamism to the
gun, then stating that the shooter should be hated, not the gun. But then here you say we shouldn't hate the "shooter", which would correspond to
Islam, even though the shooter/Islam uses it (the gun/Islamism) to suppress or kill us.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.